642 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



to it in baptism the name Dathyhius Haeckelii^ he of course could not 

 have foreseen that the poor neophyte would, like another Icarus, in a 

 very short time become a biological celebrity, ascending to the heaven 

 of terrestrial fame, and then before the end of its first decennium 

 tumbling down into the gloomy Hades of mythology. Let us see, 

 then, whether it is really dead, and whether it has ever existed at all. 

 And supposing we have to admit its merely mythological ai)parition- 

 existence, let us see what consequences result for the Moneres. 



I. History of the Moneres. In tlie spring of 1864 I observed in 

 the Mediterranean, at Villafranca, near Nice, little floating globules 

 of slime, one millimetre or half a line in diameter, which interested 

 me very much. Under the microscope each of these globules looked 

 like a little star, its centre consisting of a far smaller, structureless 

 globule, while from the outer surface radiated several thousand 

 exceedingly fine threads. Close examination with high powers 

 showed that the whole body of the star-shaped thing consisted of 

 simple albuminous cell-substance sarcode, or protoplasm ; and that 

 the threads radiating on all sides from the surface were not perma- 

 nent organs, but constantly variable, in number, size, and shape. 

 They were seen to be changing and non-persistent processes of the 

 central protoplasmic body, like the " false feet," or pseudopodia, 

 which constitute the only organs of the Rhizopods. But while in 

 the Rhizopods cell-nuclei are scattered through the protoplasm, and 

 hence their bodies, morphologically considered, are made up of one or 

 of many cells, nothmg of the kind is to be seen in the protoplasmic 

 globules observed at Villafranca. For the rest, no difference was to 

 be found between the two with resj^ect either to the motions of the 

 filaments or to the manner in which they were employed as organs of 

 touch for sensation, or as organs of nutrition for taking in food. To 

 complete the natural history of the little protoplasm-globule, wdiich I 

 had studied with great minuteness, all that was still needed was a 

 knowledge of its mode of propagation. In this, too, I was finally 

 successful. After some time the little creature broke up into two 

 halves by simple division, and each of these went on living like the 

 original one. Thus I had learned the whole life-cycle of what I had 

 to regard as one of the simplest organisms conceivable, and I gave it, 

 in recognition of its fundamental significance, the name of Proto- 

 genes primordialis, "first-born of primeval time." An accurate 

 description of it was published by me in vol. xv. of the Zeitschrift 

 fur loissenschaftUche Zoologie (p. 360, Plate XXVI., Figs. 1 and 2). 



The very next year two distinct, extremely simple organisms, very 

 closely resembling Protogenes, were described by the distinguished 

 microscopist Cienkowski. In vol. i. of the Archiv filr mikroskopische 

 Zoologie (p. 203, Plates XII.-XIV.) he published very interesting 

 " Contributions to the Knowledge of Monads." Among the various Pro- 

 tista here associated by Cienkowski under the old, ambiguous term 



